Trying to understad the northern lords : saying is not doing

[MoreOrLess]

On ‎20‎/‎08‎/‎2016 at 4:51 PM, Stannis is the man....nis said:

I'm talking about S5 SJ, Glover, Cerwyn are all there when Stannis is at CB, why wouldn't SJ who hates the wildings not give Rickon to Stannis for 1) stopping Mance and 2) to get rewards, he would been given Bolton lands and probably been made the "acting warden of the North" like LF does in the Vale unlike Rickon comes of age? The show said constantly in S5 that Stannis had the upper hand on paper so this whole "not wanting to challenge the dominate force" goes out the window because that force was challenged before and they didn't do anything, which makes their actions not make any narrative sense and solely look like plot convenience

On the show though the Umbers join the Boltons as a reaction to the WIldings coming though the wall which doesn't happen until Stannis is commited to attacking Winterfell. You can add to that as well that they only ally with Ramsay they don't swear to him, Stannis would never have accepted that.

From Stannis's standpoint as well he already had the forces to make sure the Boltons would have to hole up in Winterfell prior to desertions. The siege might not have been easy but once it started then obviously that makes it less risky for other houses to throw in their lot with him as the Bolton's forces are more tied down.

It does seem that criticism of the show drifts between it being unrealistic heroic fantasy one moment and then not enough of a heroic fantasy the next moment.

[Simbacca]

The show changed the Northern storyline in order to pander to the fan favorite characters.  It wanted to make this Jon vs Ramsey battle and shoehorned Sansa, Brienne, and Pod into the North.  It also dumbed down the Northern Lords to do this.

In the show, Rickon goes to the Umbers.  He would have informed the Umbers of Ramsey's treachery in burning Winterfell, killing the population there, and blaming it on the Ironborn.  In the show, the Umbers who went with Robb, died at the Red Wedding.  This would be scene as Frey and Bolton betrayal.  Rickon is an heir to Winterfell.  He outranks Sansa.  Jon is Rickon's "brother".  The Boltons are untrustworthy.  Stannis/The Night Watch defeated the Wildings and their army/refugee population has been reduced from 100,000 to 5,000 and are staying in Night Watch territory.  Show Umbers look like the are in a good position to manipulate everyone and come up on top.  But the show won't do this.  Only fan favorites are allowed to win.

In the book, some Umbers join Stannis, while others reluctantly join the Boltons/Freys because Great Jon is being held hostage at the Twins.  No hostages in the show.  Book Stannis helps the Glovers retake Deepwood Motte, so the Glovers, and other Northern houses, like the Mormonts, join him. 

Stannis was killed off and his storyline stolen by Jon and Sansa.  But Jon and Sansa having Stannis's storyline makes no sense in the show and causes plotholes and retcons.  Jon is part of Night Watch and getting involved with the politics of the North would be scene as breaking vows and punishable by death. As for Jon dying, show Jon was dead for 24+ hours.  Even in the cold North, he should have shown some signs of rot and decay before being brought back to life.  But the show kept a pretty Jon.  I even noticed that Beric Dondarrion was prettied up, so he would match Jon.  Book Jon was stabbed but we don't know if he dies.  He might survive his attack but be severely injured, like Bran.  Sansa is wanted for the murder of Joffrey.  In the books, she is in the Vale under a fake identity.  Sansa revealing her identity, and people ignoring this fact makes no sense.  The Vale Lords would see Ned as a confessed traitor and wouldn't want anything to do with this.  And it makes Littlefinger look like he was involved with Joffrey's death.  The Vale Lords hate Littlefinger and they would have used this against him.  The Vale Lords act like a bunch of dumb idiots.  In the North, since Show Ramsey has helped free Deepwood Motte, why are the Glovers not fighting alongside Ramsey's army, since show Glovers hate the Starks.  Why did they not arrest Jon and Sansa.  Because show Glovers are turned into idiots.   

 

[A spoon of knife and fork]

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

The show changed the Northern storyline in order to pander to the fan favorite characters.  It wanted to make this Jon vs Ramsey battle and shoehorned Sansa, Brienne, and Pod into the North.  It also dumbed down the Northern Lords to do this.

In the show, Rickon goes to the Umbers.  He would have informed the Umbers of Ramsey's treachery in burning Winterfell, killing the population there, and blaming it on the Ironborn.  

I don't believe Rickon knows this information in the show.  

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

In the show, the Umbers who went with Robb, died at the Red Wedding.  This would be scene as Frey and Bolton betrayal.  Rickon is an heir to Winterfell.  He outranks Sansa.  Jon is Rickon's "brother".  The Boltons are untrustworthy. 

Smalljon Umber only joined the Bolton cause after Roose (the traitor) was dead.  The fact that Ramsey killed his own father was probably a plus in his book.  

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

Stannis was killed off and his storyline stolen by Jon and Sansa. 

Stannis had plenty of his own storyline.  Without tWoW we don't have any information about what his book story will look like besides speculation (mostly by Stan-fans who believe he's going to be a BIG F-ING DEAL).  Jon may indeed end up in a similar situation in the book.  In fact I think it's almost guaranteed that Sansa will ride in with the Vale to rescue Jon/Winterfell, eventually (because otherwise her vale story is boring and pointless TBH).  This occurrence necessitates that Stannis fail (eventually) so that Jon will need the help.  

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

But Jon and Sansa having Stannis's storyline makes no sense in the show and causes plotholes and retcons.  Jon is part of Night Watch and getting involved with the politics of the North would be scene as breaking vows and punishable by death. 

It's not nearly so cut and dry.  Many people think Jon attacking Ramsey in the books isn't breaking his vows and that Marsh was in the wrong for kililng him. 

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

As for Jon dying, show Jon was dead for 24+ hours.  Even in the cold North, he should have shown some signs of rot and decay before being brought back to life.  But the show kept a pretty Jon.  I even noticed that Beric Dondarrion was prettied up, so he would match Jon. 

Come on.  It's magic.  Like the seasons.  You really don't have to explain this one...  and really shouldn't try.

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

Book Jon was stabbed but we don't know if he dies.  He might survive his attack but be severely injured, like Bran. 

Lol no.  Jon is dead in the book.  This was the silliest of all the silliest theories, TBH.  George obviously would have confirmed to D&D that Jon was brought back from the dead by Melisandre when they met about the future plot.  If he actually told them that Jon didn't really die then I don't see why they would change it.  

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

 

38 minutes ago, Simbacca said:

In the North, since Show Ramsey has helped free Deepwood Motte, why are the Glovers not fighting alongside Ramsey's army, since show Glovers hate the Starks.  Why did they not arrest Jon and Sansa.  Because show Glovers are turned into idiots.   

Glovers are trying to stay neutral.  To survive.  Like the Mormonts were inclined to do before Davos told Lady Lyanna about the WW.  Why would this make them idiots?  What makes you think they or anyone hate the Starks?  

[Stannis is the man....nis]

2 hours ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

Stannis had plenty of his own storyline.  Without tWoW we don't have any information about what his book story will look like besides speculation (mostly by Stan-fans who believe he's going to be a BIG F-ING DEAL).  Jon may indeed end up in a similar situation in the book.  In fact I think it's almost guaranteed that Sansa will ride in with the Vale to rescue Jon/Winterfell, eventually (because otherwise her vale story is boring and pointless TBH).  This occurrence necessitates that Stannis fail (eventually) so that Jon will need the help.  

 

How does he burn Shireen then? The events we saw in the show simple can't happen, Jon didn't go to Hardhome so he doesn't have many wildings like the show, if Stannis fails Jon has no recruiting base as the Northerns go with Stannis, and Davos is off to save Rickon so what will make LF allow to Sansa move the Vale North?

[A spoon of knife and fork]

1 hour ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

How does he burn Shireen then? The events we saw in the show simple can't happen, Jon didn't go to Hardhome so he doesn't have many wildings like the show, if Stannis fails Jon has no recruiting base as the Northerns go with Stannis, and Davos is off to save Rickon so what will make LF allow to Sansa move the Vale North?

The exact order of events won't be the same, obviously.  Here's the events we can be quite sure will occur, though we can only guess at the order. 

stannis will order Shireen sacrifice in a moment of desperation. 

Jon will be resurrected by melisandre

Rickon will die

Jon will be in a big battle that is going badly until Sansa will bring the Vale and help 

[Stannis is the man....nis]

1 hour ago, A spoon of knife and fork said:

The exact order of events won't be the same, obviously.  Here's the events we can be quite sure will occur, though we can only guess at the order. 

stannis will order Shireen sacrifice in a moment of desperation. 

Jon will be resurrected by melisandre

Rickon will die

Jon will be in a big battle that is going badly until Sansa will bring the Vale and help 

Why should the last two be something we are sure occurs?

[Rex999]

This is a rare case that I thought the show was being way more realistic and honest then the books

The way the northern lords were reacting seemed completely believable to me and believe that many people in the real world would react the same way if they were put in that situation.   

These are people that have lost everything thanks to that idiot Rob Stark 

They are all desperately trying to survive and I don't blame them at all for not being willing to throw there lives away for the man who put them in this horrible situation in the first place 

 

In the books The northern lords reaction felt like something that would only happen in a Fantasy story  

The northern lords are honorably being loyal to the Starks and blindly worshiping them like gods lol

They are all perfectly willing to throw their lives away for a stark girl that they are not even sure is the real Arya

It always felt like something out of lord of the rings to me and it was one of the few times that books seemed more like a fairy tale than a gritty political story 

 

 

 

[A spoon of knife and fork]

6 hours ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

Why should the last two be something we are sure occurs?

Rickon dying always seemed inevitable to me.  Dying as a plot device seems appropriate given his status as a non-character.

Sansa riding in with a Vale army to reclaim the North is something that's been partly set up in the books.  LF alludes to the possibility of raising the Vale on her behalf after she reveals herself and marries Harry.  As for saving Jon it just fits, IMO. Jon isn't going to be counting Turnips at the wall forever.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

1 hour ago, Rex999 said:

This is a rare case that I thought the show was being way more realistic and honest then the books

The way the northern lords were reacting seemed completely believable to me and believe that many people in the real world would react the same way if they were put in that situation.   

These are people have lost everything thanks to that idiot Rob Stark 

They are all desperately trying to survive and I don't blame them at all for not being willing to throw there lives away for the man who put them in this horrible situation in the first place 

 

In the books The northern lords reaction felt like something that would only happen in a Fantasy story  

The northern lords are honorably being loyal to the Starks and blindly worshiping them like gods lol

They are all perfectly willing to throw their lives away for a stark girl that they are not even sure is the real Arya

It always felt like something out of lord of the rings to me and it was one of the few times that books seemed more like a fairy tale than a gritty political story 

 

 

 

It's seems you don't get it because you are looking at it one way yes the Northerns want the Starks back but their is a second big motivation going on you clearly are missing, hatred/anger/desire for revenge. The Boltons betrayed their countrymen for a hated Southern House and murdered their beloved king through violating one of the most scared rights in their culture (guest rights). An now the Lannisters are in turmoil, Joffery and Tywin are dead, a small boy sits on the throne, religious nuts have taken over KL, the Frey's can't commit fully to the Bolton's as the RL is still unsecured, Mance was stopped, and Stannis is on the move from CB, the time was right for the Northern Lords to get back into the frey. Why should they sit on the sidelines? Because you think it's all Robb's fault? Maybe they don't look at it like that and blame Roose, the IB, Theon, and others for what happened.

[Rex999]

47 minutes ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

their is a second big motivation going on you clearly are missing, hatred/anger/desire for revenge. The Boltons betrayed their countrymen for a hated Southern House and murdered their beloved king through violating one of the most scared rights in their culture (guest rights)

even when you explain it to me it still seems silly and ridiculous  

Robb is 100 percent to blame for everything that is going on here and it was his incompetents the lead to the red wedding

It would be one thing if the Boltons had planed to betray Robb from the beginning but in this case they were loyal to Robb until it became clear to them that this fool was making idiotic decisions that was going to end up causing them to lose the war;      

even Walder Frey did not go into this looking to betray Robb Stark

It was Robb Stark breaking his word that caused Walder Frey to turn on him

If I was a northern lord sure I would be mad at the Boltons but I would hate Robb even more because his terrible decisions are the reason The Boltons are now in power in the first place              

As far as I'm concerned if Robb was real He would be seen like many people Saw LBJ during Vietnam or George W. Bush during the Iraq war

"A foolish leader who was in way over his head and ended up getting many of his countrymen killed"

 

[Stannis is the man....nis]

2 minutes ago, Rex999 said:

even when you explain it to me it still seems silly and redious 

 

Robb is 100 percent to blame for everything that is going on here and it was his incompetents the lead to the red wedding

 

It would be one thing if the boltons had planed to betray Robb from the beginning but in this case they were loyal to Robb until it became clear to them that this fool was making idiotic decisions that was going to end up causing them to lose the war;      

even Walder Frey did not go into this looking to betray Robb stark

It was Robb Stark  breaking his word that caused Walder Frey to turn on him

If I was a northern lord sure I would be mad  at the Boltons but I would hate Robb even more because his terrible decisions  are the reason The Boltons are now in power in the first place              

 

As far as I'm concerned if Robb was real He would be seen like many people Saw LBJ during Vietnam or George W. Bush during the Iraq war

"A foolish leader who was in way over his head and ended up getting many of his countrymen killed"

 

That is not true or are you forgetting Ramsay and the sack of WF? Plus you may hate "the fool" for getting into the RW situation but their is no reason why any lord should feel that way, not everyone has the "only look out for me at whatever cost" attitude that men like Roose and LF use to justify their actions and can it turn hate men like Roose and LF more for their actions over hating Robb and Ned for for their honest mistakes

[NutBurz]

A boy sat the Iron Throne when Stannis´ fleet burned in the Blackwater. The issues with the Sparrows are only really felt by southern nobility, more specifically the court. The Riverlands are relatively in peace, there´s no line of communication between the bwb or the blackfish with northern lords in order for these latter to have useful information on Frey army movements. Stannis does not have any clear advantage, and everyone knows he will not stop at Winterfell - is it really so hard to accept they might not want to get involved in more southern wars for a foreign king with a foreign, violent religion?

They won´t forget the Red Wedding, but that doesn´t mean they have to act now.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

Just now, NutBurz said:

A boy sat the Iron Throne when Stannis´ fleet burned in the Blackwater. The issues with the Sparrows are only really felt by southern nobility, more specifically the court. The Riverlands are relatively in peace, there´s no line of communication between the bwb or the blackfish with northern lords in order for these latter to have useful information on Frey army movements. Stannis does not have any clear advantage, and everyone knows he will not stop at Winterfell - is it really so hard to accept they might not want to get involved in more southern wars for a foreign king with a foreign, violent religion?

They won´t forget the Red Wedding, but that doesn´t mean they have to act now.

No Joffery is a "man" by medieval standards Tommen is only 5, no the sparrows aren't just felt south because they are running the capital that affects everyone as it clearly ties up the crowns time and resources, granted the RL could be true that the North doesn't know how bad the Freys have the RL, but still right now Roose is in his weakest state as a Warden that he may ever be and to sit it out for some hypothetical better situation with a Stark leading the way over Stannis is foolish

[TheCasualObserver]

3 hours ago, Rex999 said:

This is a rare case that I thought the show was being way more realistic and honest then the books

The way the northern lords were reacting seemed completely believable to me and believe that many people in the real world would react the same way if they were put in that situation.   

These are people that have lost everything thanks to that idiot Rob Stark 

They are all desperately trying to survive and I don't blame them at all for not being willing to throw there lives away for the man who put them in this horrible situation in the first place 

 

In the books The northern lords reaction felt like something that would only happen in a Fantasy story  

The northern lords are honorably being loyal to the Starks and blindly worshiping them like gods lol

They are all perfectly willing to throw their lives away for a stark girl that they are not even sure is the real Arya

It always felt like something out of lord of the rings to me and it was one of the few times that books seemed more like a fairy tale than a gritty political story 

 

 

 

My biggest issue with the end of the season is that Ramsay had any political power at all. His actions were a cavalcade of idiocy which should have isolated him from both his allies and his men.

Marrying Sansa broke the Bolton/Lannister alliance, removing any legal reason why the Bolton's specifically should be in charge of the North. Ramsay then spent his time trying to cow the Northmen into submission by flaying them alive in their own castles - hardly a popular policy on tax. He then loses his wife (a hugely embarrassing moment for a feudal lord, proving he cannot control his own household) which removes what little authority or legitimacy he had left. Finally, he murders his father, mother in law and baby brother making him a kinslayer, the most reviled type of criminal in Westerosi society. The question of realism might well be asked in regard to the book plot's "Grand Northern conspiracy" or the Northmen fighting for "The Ned's little girl", but Ramsay's continuing hold on power is still a far more egregious break from reality. It's a mistake to think that simply because Ramsay is a bad guy, that makes the show gritty and realistic when he starts winning.

Rasmay's actions are presented in the show because the writers wanted the audience to hate him, but really, it just turns him into a cartoon. There may be monsters like Ramsay in the real world, but none of them have the capacity to wield political power. 

[Stannis is the man....nis]

2 minutes ago, TheCasualObserver said:

My biggest issue with the end of the season is that Ramsay had any political power at all. His actions were a cavalcade of idiocy which should have isolated him from both his allies and his men.

Marrying Sansa broke the Bolton/Lannister alliance, removing any legal reason why the Bolton's specifically should be in charge of the North. Ramsay then spent his time trying to cow the Northmen into submission by flaying them alive in their own castles - hardly a popular policy on tax. He then loses his wife (a hugely embarrassing moment for a feudal lord, proving he cannot control his own household) which removes what little authority or legitimacy he had left. Finally, he murders his father, mother in law and baby brother making him a kinslayer, the most reviled type of criminal in Westerosi society. The question of realism might well be asked in regard to the book plot's "Grand Northern conspiracy" or the Northmen fighting for "The Ned's little girl", but Ramsay's continuing hold on power is still a far more egregious break from reality. It's a mistake to think that simply because Ramsay is a bad guy, that makes the show gritty and realistic when he starts winning.

Rasmay's actions are presented in the show because the writers wanted the audience to hate him, but really, it just turns him into a cartoon. There may be monsters like Ramsay in the real world, but none of them have the capacity to wield political power. 

^Great points

[NutBurz]

35 minutes ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

No Joffery is a "man" by medieval standards Tommen is only 5, no the sparrows aren't just felt south because they are running the capital that affects everyone as it clearly ties up the crowns time and resources, granted the RL could be true that the North doesn't know how bad the Freys have the RL, but still right now Roose is in his weakest state as a Warden that he may ever be and to sit it out for some hypothetical better situation with a Stark leading the way over Stannis is foolish

This idea that boys were men in medieval time because "responsibility" is a little laughable. The real thing is that boys kept being called men because people thought that was the way to go, just like they thought beating up children was the way to go. Neither work, and most people wouldn´t bet their chips on it. They wouldn´t spank a child into leaning how to talk (at least not as a first strategy), for example, or consider a 15 years old a "man grown" for purposes of war. Robb wins almost every battle based on the fact that Tywin treats him like a child, and Robb loses the war because he acts like one. I don´t think anyone saw any difference between having Joffrey or Tommen as kings when it comes to military impetus.

I highly disagree with the notion that the populace in general feels any significant effect of the rise to power of the High Sparrow, to the point that it would be a factor considered by the Northern Lords in their political calculations.

I don´t consider it bad that they do join Stannis in the book, I just also don´t consider it bad that they don´t join with him. Both have very reasonable arguments to happen.

7 minutes ago, TheCasualObserver said:

My biggest issue with the end of the season is that Ramsay had any political power at all.

There are no other Boltons to compete for the status quo, his power resides on the fact that no one else has any power, the Northern houses have almost no armies and absolutely no leadership. The kind of power Ramsay has was very frequent in history.

[Stannis is the man....nis]

1 minute ago, NutBurz said:

This idea that boys were men in medieval time because "responsibility" is a little laughable. The real thing is that boys kept being called men because people thought that was the way to go, just like they thought beating up children was the way to go. Neither work, and most people wouldn´t bet their chips on it. They wouldn´t spank a child into leaning how to talk (at least not as a first strategy), for example, or consider a 15 years old a "man grown" for purposes of war. Robb wins almost every battle based on the fact that Tywin treats him like a child, and Robb loses the war because he acts like one. I don´t think anyone saw any difference between having Joffrey or Tommen as kings when it comes to military impetus.

I highly disagree with the notion that the populace in general feels any significant effect of the rise to power of the High Sparrow, to the point that it would be a factor considered by the Northern Lords in their political calculations.

I don´t consider it bad that they do join Stannis in the book, I just also don´t consider it bad that they don´t join with him. Both have very reasonable arguments to happen.

There are no other Boltons to compete for the status quo, his power resides on the fact that no one else has any power, the Northern houses have almost no armies and absolutely no leadership. The kind of power Ramsay has was very frequent in history.

The Umber's in the show clearly could have, Ramsay states they have the power to challenge them in S6 E2 or3, they have Rickon (a huge rallying point), and a leader in Smalljon but they give it all away

[Rex999]

53 minutes ago, TheCasualObserver said:

The question of realism might well be asked in regard to the book plot's "Grand Northern conspiracy" or the Northmen fighting for "The Ned's little girl", but Ramsay's continuing hold on power is still a far more egregious break from reality. It's a mistake to think that simply because Ramsay is a bad guy, that makes the show gritty and realistic when he starts winning.

Rasmay's actions are presented in the show because the writers wanted the audience to hate him, but really, it just turns him into a cartoon. There may be monsters like Ramsay in the real world, but none of them have the capacity to wield political power. 

 

I dont agree at all

Ramsey being cartoonishly evil is not remotely unbelievable  

the horrible truth is that we have had real life rulers throughout history who would make Ramsey look nice and sane by comparison  

 

 

I can buy someone like Rasmey Because I know that the Roman Emperor Nero existed in real life 

Nero was just as horrible as Ramsey and like Ramsey He killed his own parents

I cant buy This plot of the Northern lords blindly throwing thier lives away for a king that was responsible for all of the problems in the first place

and real life most people died for kings because they had no choice 

But In A song of ice and fire they do it because they are loyal and Honorable people lol

Its fairy tail nonsense that dos not fit the world Martin has created at all

       

[Stannis is the man....nis]

4 minutes ago, Rex999 said:

 

I dont agree at all

Ramsrey being catoonshly  evil is not remototlry unbilibiel  nor is      

\the horrible truth is that we have had real life rulers thruous history who would make Ramsey look nice  and sane by coaprasion 

 

 

I can buy someone like Rasmey Because I know the  Roman Emperor Nero existed in real life 

Nero was just as horrible as Ramsey and like Ramsey He killed his own parents

 

I cant buy This plot of  the Northern lords  blindly throwing thier lives away for a king that was respible for all of the problems in the first place

and real life most died for kings because they had no choice 

But In A song of ice and fire they do it because they are loyal and Honorable people lol

 

Its fairy tail nonsense that dos not fit the world Martin has created at all

       

You are citing men born legitimately and of royalty Ramsay is a BASTARD of a hated warden who just took his power though the most despicable actions and his power comes through a marriage who's bride just ran away. Also just because you blame Robb for what happened doesn't mean it's "fairly tale" for the lords not too and instead blame Roose and the Freys for their dishonorable actions

[Rex999]

2 minutes ago, Stannis is the man....nis said:

You are citing men born legitimately and of royalty Ramsay is a BASTARD of a hated warden who just took his power though the most despicable actions. 

Correction Ramsey was a legitimized bastard who was not in power that long